adventurelad

Members
  • Content count

    87
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About adventurelad

  • Rank
    Member
  1. adventurelad

    A rant about flying

    Some actual numbers regarding the original topic...i know, highly frowned upon in these parts... http://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/columnist/mcgee/2014/09/24/airplane-reclining-seat-pitch-width/16105491/ adventurelad
  2. adventurelad

    Artemis?

    I am also surprised to see that the tiebars from the king post to the front beam still terminate midway along the beam... at the same failure point of AR1... considering the catastrophic failure of the beam in AR1 i would have expected a redesign... if you look at the arrangement of ETNZ and LR the tiebars terminate virtually at the beam to hull joint... The inboard location of the ties is to match the inboard position of the back stays .. the bracing is also terminated inboard to deal with the compression arising from the back stay and king post tie .. there are no bending loads applied to the rear beam with this arrangement .. I don't think the AR engineers are so incompetent that they would messed up such a simple system . Seems to me the vertical component of the backstay load is still applying a bending load to the rear cross-beam. No (or very little) bending in the transverse plane, but still plenty of bending in the vertical plane...